Other bulletins in this series include:

Breast Surgery

Showing posts with label checklist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label checklist. Show all posts

Wednesday, 13 December 2023

 

The use of checklists in the intensive care unit: a scoping review

 

by Ethan J. Erikson, Daniel A. Edelman, Fiona M. Brewster, Stuart D. Marshall, Maryann C. Turner, Vineet V. Sarode and David J. Brewster 

 

Critical Care volume 27, Article number: 468 (2023) Published: 30 November 2023

 

Background

Despite the extensive volume of research published on checklists in the intensive care unit (ICU), no review has been published on the broader role of checklists within the intensive care unit, their implementation and validation, and the recommended clinical context for their use. Accordingly, a scoping review was necessary to map the current literature and to guide future research on intensive care checklists. This review focuses on what checklists are currently used, how they are used, process of checklist development and implementation, and outcomes associated with checklist use.

Methods

A systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases was conducted, followed by a grey literature search. The abstracts of the identified studies were screened. Full texts of relevant articles were reviewed, and the references of included studies were subsequently screened for additional relevant articles. Details of the study characteristics, study design, checklist intervention, and outcomes were extracted.

Results

Our search yielded 2046 studies, of which 167 were selected for further analysis. Checklists identified in these studies were categorised into the following types: rounding checklists; delirium screening checklists; transfer and handover checklists; central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) prevention checklists; airway management checklists; and other. Of 72 significant clinical outcomes reported, 65 were positive, five were negative, and two were mixed. Of 122 significant process of care outcomes reported, 114 were positive and eight were negative.

Conclusions

Checklists are commonly used in the intensive care unit and appear in many clinical guidelines. Delirium screening checklists and rounding checklists are well implemented and validated in the literature. Clinical and process of care outcomes associated with checklist use are predominantly positive. Future research on checklists in the intensive care unit should focus on establishing clinical guidelines for checklist types and processes for ongoing modification and improvements using post-intervention data.

Thursday, 17 June 2021

Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury: An Exploratory Multicenter International Quality-Improvement Study in the ICUs With Variable Resources

 

Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury: An Exploratory Multicenter International Quality-Improvement Study in the ICUs With Variable Resources

 

 

by Vukoja, Marija MD, PhD1,2; Dong, Yue MD3; Adhikari, Neill K. J. MDCM, MSc4–6; Schultz, Marcus J. MD, PhD7–10; Arabi, Yaseen M. MD11; Martin-Loeches, Ignacio MD, PhD12–14; Hache, Manuel MD15; Gavrilovic, Srdjan MD1,2; Kashyap, Rahul MB BS, MBA3; Gajic, Ognjen MD, MSc16; for the Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury (CERTAIN) Investigators of the SCCM Discovery Network Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury (CERTAIN)

 

Critical Care Medicine: June 2021 - Volume 49 - Issue 6 - p e598-e612

 

 

OBJECTIVES: 

To determine whether the “Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury” decision support tool during ICU admission and rounding is associated with improvements in nonadherence to evidence-based daily care processes and outcomes in variably resourced ICUs.

DESIGN, SETTINGS, PATIENTS: 

This before-after study was performed in 34 ICUs (15 countries) from 2013 to 2017. Data were collected for 3 months before and 6 months after Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation.

INTERVENTIONS: 

Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation using remote simulation training.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: 

The coprimary outcomes, modified from the original protocol before data analysis, were nonadherence to 10 basic care processes and ICU and hospital length of stay. There were 1,447 patients in the preimplementation phase and 2,809 patients in the postimplementation phase. After adjusting for center effect, Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation was associated with reduced nonadherence to care processes (adjusted incidence rate ratio [95% CI]): deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis (0.74 [0.68–0.81), peptic ulcer prophylaxis (0.46 [0.38–0.57]), spontaneous breathing trial (0.81 [0.76–0.86]), family conferences (0.86 [0.81–0.92]), and daily assessment for the need of central venous catheters (0.85 [0.81–0.90]), urinary catheters (0.84 [0.80–0.88]), antimicrobials (0.66 [0.62–0.71]), and sedation (0.62 [0.57–0.67]). Analyses adjusted for baseline characteristics showed associations of Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury implementation with decreased ICU length of stay (adjusted ratio of geometric means [95% CI]) 0.86 [0.80–0.92]), hospital length of stay (0.92 [0.85–0.97]), and hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI], 0.81 (0.69–0.95).

CONCLUSIONS: 

A quality-improvement intervention with remote simulation training to implement a decision support tool was associated with decreased nonadherence to daily care processes, shorter length of stay, and decreased mortality.

Wednesday, 22 February 2017

A Direct Observation Checklist to Measure Respect and Dignity in the ICU

A Direct Observation Checklist to Measure Respect and Dignity in the ICU
Carrese, J A et al
Critical Care Medicine: February 2017 - Volume 45 - Issue 2 - p 263–270

Objective: Treating patients and family members with respect and dignity is a core objective of health care, yet it is unclear how best to measure this in the ICU setting. Accordingly, we sought to create a direct observation checklist to assess the “respect and dignity status” of an ICU. Design: A draft checklist based on previous work was iteratively revised to enhance accuracy and feasibility. Setting: Seven ICUs within the Johns Hopkins Health System. Subjects: A total of 351 patient-clinician encounters with 184 different patients. Interventions: Four study team members pilot tested the checklist between January and August 2015. 
Measurements and Main Results: Standard psychometric analyses were performed. The direct observation checklist exhibits strong content and face validity as well as high reliability and internal consistency. All items load on one factor that supports the unidimensionality of the total index. Furthermore, concurrent validity of the direct observation checklist is demonstrated by statistically significant differences in mean scores between ICUs, between types of clinicians, and between patients’ clinical status and mood. 
Conclusions: We rigorously developed, pilot tested, and analyzed a direct observation checklist designed to assess the extent to which patients and families in the ICU setting are treated with respect and dignity. Future research should validate this checklist in other settings and compare its results with other measures. Data gathered about individual items on the direct observation checklist could be used to target areas for training and education; doing so should help facilitate more respectful treatment of patients and their families.